On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:51:14 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> fredag den 15. april 2022 kl. 01.28.50 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 4:20:03 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> > > > On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > > > >> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> > > > >>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > > >>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz..dk wrote:
> > > > >>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > > >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> > > > >>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> > > > >>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> > > > >>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> > > > >>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> > > > >>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> > > > >>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> > > > >> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> > > > >
> > > > > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> > > > Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> > > > under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
> > > > trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> > > > so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
> > > >
> > > > The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
> > > > power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
> > > > installed every few 100km along major highways.
> > > I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
> > $120,000 6 cu.m(est) 1500lbs (est) 100kwhr (guess)
> >
> > They claim 300 miles range, but i really doubt it for fully loaded truck.
> modern 40 ton diesel trucks average something like ~4km/l
> a liter of diesel is ~10kWh

That liter of diesel will get you 2.5 to 3 miles. 10 kWh will get you 5 miles according to Tesla. 100 kWh, 500 miles.

To Ed, It is silly to think they are providing fuel consumption data for anything other than a fully loaded truck. The people they are providing data to aren't stupid.

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 15/4/22 11:57 am, Ricky wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:48:23 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>> On 15/4/22 9:19 am, Ricky wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>>>> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>>>>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>>>>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>>>>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>>>>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>>>>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>>>>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>>>>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>>>>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>>>>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>>>>>
>>>>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>>>> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
>>>> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
>>>> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
>>>> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
>>>>
>>>> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
>>>> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
>>>> installed every few 100km along major highways.
>>>
>>> I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
>>>
>> Rechargable. Currently Lithium, but the module form factor is designed
>> to adapt to likely new chemistries. The important point is the drive
>> motor and battery fits into the existing motor cavity and fuel tank
>> locations, so there is no structural modification required.
>>
>> The conversion cost is equivalent to rebuilding or replacing the diesel,
>> and the operating cost per kilometre a little over half, and service
>> costs also significantly reduced.
>>
>> <https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=Interchangeable%20Parts>
>
> I suppose a battery swap might be more useful for a truck than for cars. But there are issues with scheduling. When a truck has a delivery, that delivery has a schedule. You arrive by the time of your dock appointment or you lose it. I would expect battery swaps to be the same way. So an appointment is made in advance and what do we do to make sure we arrive in time for appointments? We arrive early. The whole point of the battery swap is to reduce wasted time charging. So how does it help to have to arrive 15 to 30 minutes early to make sure of meeting the appointment, vs. simply spending 45 minutes to charge?
>
> It's hard to imagine a battery swap for trucks that is so rapid that no appointment is needed. But maybe that's just the limit of my imagination.

It's not that hard to read the damn FAQs, is it?
The answer is 3 minutes (which took me about 3 seconds to find):

<https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=How%20does>

"The Janus Electric software manages the time availability of charged
batteries."

> Comparing to fueling up or charging, the battery swap is going to require trained personnel and something that may be a bit on the fancy side to swap out the battery. I don't know if that will be a significant factor in the cost of the service or not.
>
> The main issue will likely be the company itself. You are limited to working with one outfit, serving how large an area? They can even fold.

For an e-power enthusiast, you're very full of reasons why it won't
work. Yet you bleat so loudly when people act the same way about Tesla's.

CH

On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:06:47 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:51:14 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> > fredag den 15. april 2022 kl. 01.28.50 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 4:20:03 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> > > > > On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > > > > >> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz..dk wrote:
> > > > > >>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > > > >>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > > > >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> > > > > >>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> > > > > >>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> > > > > >>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> > > > > >>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> > > > > >>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> > > > > >>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> > > > > >> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> > > > > Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> > > > > under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
> > > > > trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> > > > > so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
> > > > >
> > > > > The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
> > > > > power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
> > > > > installed every few 100km along major highways.
> > > > I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
> > > $120,000 6 cu.m(est) 1500lbs (est) 100kwhr (guess)
> > >
> > > They claim 300 miles range, but i really doubt it for fully loaded truck.
> > modern 40 ton diesel trucks average something like ~4km/l
> > a liter of diesel is ~10kWh
> That liter of diesel will get you 2.5 to 3 miles. 10 kWh will get you 5 miles according to Tesla. 100 kWh, 500 miles.

That's for burning. But diesel engine is around 30% to 50% efficient for moving. 10kWh will get you 2 to 3 miles.

> To Ed, It is silly to think they are providing fuel consumption data for anything other than a fully loaded truck. The people they are providing data to aren't stupid.

Now, you are being silly with your data.

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 1:15:48 AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:06:47 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:51:14 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> > > fredag den 15. april 2022 kl. 01.28.50 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 4:20:03 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> > > > > > On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > > > > > >> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> > > > > > >>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > > > > >>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > > > > > >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> > > > > > >>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> > > > > > >>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> > > > > > >>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> > > > > > >>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> > > > > > >>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> > > > > > >>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> > > > > > >> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> > > > > > Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> > > > > > under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
> > > > > > trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> > > > > > so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
> > > > > > power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
> > > > > > installed every few 100km along major highways.
> > > > > I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
> > > > $120,000 6 cu.m(est) 1500lbs (est) 100kwhr (guess)
> > > >
> > > > They claim 300 miles range, but i really doubt it for fully loaded truck.
> > > modern 40 ton diesel trucks average something like ~4km/l
> > > a liter of diesel is ~10kWh
> > That liter of diesel will get you 2.5 to 3 miles. 10 kWh will get you 5 miles according to Tesla. 100 kWh, 500 miles.
> That's for burning. But diesel engine is around 30% to 50% efficient for moving. 10kWh will get you 2 to 3 miles.

3kWh (30% of 10kWh) will get 2 to 3 miles, or less than 1 mile per kWh

> > To Ed, It is silly to think they are providing fuel consumption data for anything other than a fully loaded truck. The people they are providing data to aren't stupid.
> Now, you are being silly with your data.

On 2022-04-15, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:48:23 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>> On 15/4/22 9:19 am, Ricky wrote:
>> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>> >> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
>> >>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>> >>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>> >>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> >>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> >>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> >>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>> >>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> >>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>> >>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>> >>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>> >>>
>> >>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>> >> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
>> >> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
>> >> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
>> >> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
>> >>
>> >> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
>> >> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
>> >> installed every few 100km along major highways.
>> >
>> > I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
>> >
>> Rechargable. Currently Lithium, but the module form factor is designed
>> to adapt to likely new chemistries. The important point is the drive
>> motor and battery fits into the existing motor cavity and fuel tank
>> locations, so there is no structural modification required.
>>
>> The conversion cost is equivalent to rebuilding or replacing the diesel,
>> and the operating cost per kilometre a little over half, and service
>> costs also significantly reduced.
>>
>> <https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=Interchangeable%20Parts>
>
> I suppose a battery swap might be more useful for a truck than for cars. But there are issues with scheduling. When a truck has a delivery, that delivery has a schedule. You arrive by the time of your dock appointment or you lose it. I would expect battery swaps to be the same way. So an appointment is made in advance and what do we do to make sure we arrive in time for appointments? We arrive early. The whole point of the battery swap is to reduce wasted time charging. So how does it help to have to arrive 15 to 30 minutes early to make sure of meeting the appointment, vs. simply spending 45 minutes to charge?
>
> It's hard to imagine a battery swap for trucks that is so rapid that
> no appointment is needed. But maybe that's just the limit of my
> imagination.

I can't see it being significantly slower than swapping trailers.

drive into position, unplug the cables, release the clamps, whistle
for a fork-lift, crane, or whatever.

> The main issue will likely be the company itself. You are limited
> to working with one outfit, serving how large an area? They can even
> fold.

yeah, it's a risk if you're stuck with a single provider.

--
Jasen.

Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
> fredag den 15. april 2022 kl. 01.28.50 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 4:20:03 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>>>> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>>>>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>>>>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>>>>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>>>>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>>>>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>>>>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>>>>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>>>>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>>>>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>>>>>
>>>>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>>>> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
>>>> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
>>>> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
>>>> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
>>>>
>>>> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
>>>> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
>>>> installed every few 100km along major highways.
>>> I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
>> $120,000 6 cu.m(est) 1500lbs (est) 100kwhr (guess)
>>
>> They claim 300 miles range, but i really doubt it for fully loaded truck.
>
> modern 40 ton diesel trucks average something like ~4km/l
> a liter of diesel is ~10kWh

In Denmark or Holland or Florida, maybe. In Switzerland or Colorado,
not so much. ;)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 6:27:50 AM UTC-7, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
> > fredag den 15. april 2022 kl. 01.28.50 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 4:20:03 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >>>> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
> >>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >>>>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >>>>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal..
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >>>>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >>>>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >>>>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >>>>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> >>>>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >>>>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >>>> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> >>>> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
> >>>> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> >>>> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
> >>>>
> >>>> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
> >>>> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
> >>>> installed every few 100km along major highways.
> >>> I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
> >> $120,000 6 cu.m(est) 1500lbs (est) 100kwhr (guess)
> >>
> >> They claim 300 miles range, but i really doubt it for fully loaded truck.
> >
> > modern 40 ton diesel trucks average something like ~4km/l
> > a liter of diesel is ~10kWh
> In Denmark or Holland or Florida, maybe. In Switzerland or Colorado,
> not so much. ;)

For us imperialist: 4 * 3.78 * 0.62 = 9.37 miles per gal. That's pretty good. We used to deal with 5 to 6 mpg for big trucks. 30% of 37.8kWhr (1 gal) for moving is 9.37 miles for 12 kWhr or around 0.8 mile per kWhr.

On 4/14/2022 4:24 PM, Ricky wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 4:53:33 PM UTC-4, amdx wrote:
>> On 4/13/2022 4:52 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>> Yep, I put a 2hp 28V motor on a go Kart. 2HP = 1492 watts/28V = 53 amps.
>> But I ran it on 48v and the 250 amp meter pegged on acceleration.
>> 48v x 250 = 12,000 watts. 12,000 / 746 = 16 HP. We could run it a full speed
>> 40mph without any heat problems, but by the time you got to full speed
>> the current
>> had dropped way down.
> Many years ago some guys from a car magazine tried making a dragster out of a mail jeep and an electric motor, DC commutator I believe. They had a little trouble with the commutator I believe, but the ultimate problem was they used a cog belt drive, and kept shredding the belts! I guess no one tried doing any math to see what the forces would be.
>
 At one time I took it to a local marina where there were several guys.
One heavy guy got on, he nailed it and took every tooth of my motor
sprocket!
Easy fix, I had on at home. So, ya, torque up the wazoo!
         Mikek

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 4/13/2022 10:34 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
> Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:a42b2143-d5b6-4eec-a2a1-da348c1ee3aen@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>>>
>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight
>>> calculation?
>>>
>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors.
>> For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per
>> wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>>
>>
> For one thing you are being presumptuous... again. Not very
> bright.
>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjhGSy5pCJA>
Seems all show and no go. 6 years on Youtube and not a single comment,
you can be the first!

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 22:02:03 +0100, Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>>
>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>>
>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>
> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.

When did ICE start meaning Internal Combustion Engine and not In Car Entertainment? Classified ads always said ICE if it had a good stereo.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 20:52:41 +0100, RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>
> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>
> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -

It's only fast while there's enough Lithium and electricity to go around. These are both running very low.

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:00:53 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> On 15/4/22 11:57 am, Ricky wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:48:23 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >> On 15/4/22 9:19 am, Ricky wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >>>> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
> >>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >>>>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >>>>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal..
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >>>>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >>>>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >>>>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >>>>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> >>>>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >>>>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >>>> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> >>>> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
> >>>> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> >>>> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
> >>>>
> >>>> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
> >>>> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
> >>>> installed every few 100km along major highways.
> >>>
> >>> I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
> >>>
> >> Rechargable. Currently Lithium, but the module form factor is designed
> >> to adapt to likely new chemistries. The important point is the drive
> >> motor and battery fits into the existing motor cavity and fuel tank
> >> locations, so there is no structural modification required.
> >>
> >> The conversion cost is equivalent to rebuilding or replacing the diesel,
> >> and the operating cost per kilometre a little over half, and service
> >> costs also significantly reduced.
> >>
> >> <https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=Interchangeable%20Parts>
> >
> > I suppose a battery swap might be more useful for a truck than for cars.. But there are issues with scheduling. When a truck has a delivery, that delivery has a schedule. You arrive by the time of your dock appointment or you lose it. I would expect battery swaps to be the same way. So an appointment is made in advance and what do we do to make sure we arrive in time for appointments? We arrive early. The whole point of the battery swap is to reduce wasted time charging. So how does it help to have to arrive 15 to 30 minutes early to make sure of meeting the appointment, vs. simply spending 45 minutes to charge?
> >
> > It's hard to imagine a battery swap for trucks that is so rapid that no appointment is needed. But maybe that's just the limit of my imagination.
> It's not that hard to read the damn FAQs, is it?

This is one of those web sites I find very hard to read because instead of making the site legible, they chose to use stylish, like grey fonts with thin strokes. Sorry, they clearly are not looking for business or investment from me.

I think I was in second grade when I was taught to not read every word individually, but to scan the paragraph looking at the shapes of words. My vision is no longer good enough to be able to do that for these obscured web sites. So rather than read every word, one at a time, I read none of them and visit web sites that aren't designed to torture their viewers.

That's why I am not interested in reading the *damn* FAQ.

> The answer is 3 minutes (which took me about 3 seconds to find):
>
> <https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=How%20does>
>
> "The Janus Electric software manages the time availability of charged
> batteries."

The three minutes is the time to actually change the battery. How long does it take to drive to the facility, get in line and handle the payment? I don't see any of that mentioned in the FAQ. It's not three minutes to swap the battery in any real sense, just like it's not 5 minutes to fill your gas tank at a service station.

> > Comparing to fueling up or charging, the battery swap is going to require trained personnel and something that may be a bit on the fancy side to swap out the battery. I don't know if that will be a significant factor in the cost of the service or not.
> >
> > The main issue will likely be the company itself. You are limited to working with one outfit, serving how large an area? They can even fold.
> For an e-power enthusiast, you're very full of reasons why it won't
> work. Yet you bleat so loudly when people act the same way about Tesla's.

Analogies are only useful when they are useful analogies. What I say about BEVs has nothing to do with this company. I didn't even know e-power was a thing.

If you think my points are of no value, then explain that to me. Or you can just whine that I'm being "unfair". I didn't say it would not work. In fact, I start off saying it might be more useful for trucks than cars. It would have an even better chance of working if it used a primary battery with a much longer range. But mostly, there needs to be some competition on the battery replacement side.

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 8:31:03 AM UTC-4, Jasen Betts wrote:
> On 2022-04-15, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:48:23 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >> On 15/4/22 9:19 am, Ricky wrote:
> >> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >> >> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
> >> >>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >> >>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >> >>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >> >>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >> >>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >> >>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >> >>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >> >>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> >> >>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >> >>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >> >> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> >> >> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
> >> >> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> >> >> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
> >> >>
> >> >> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
> >> >> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
> >> >> installed every few 100km along major highways.
> >> >
> >> > I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
> >> >
> >> Rechargable. Currently Lithium, but the module form factor is designed
> >> to adapt to likely new chemistries. The important point is the drive
> >> motor and battery fits into the existing motor cavity and fuel tank
> >> locations, so there is no structural modification required.
> >>
> >> The conversion cost is equivalent to rebuilding or replacing the diesel,
> >> and the operating cost per kilometre a little over half, and service
> >> costs also significantly reduced.
> >>
> >> <https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=Interchangeable%20Parts>
> >
> > I suppose a battery swap might be more useful for a truck than for cars.. But there are issues with scheduling. When a truck has a delivery, that delivery has a schedule. You arrive by the time of your dock appointment or you lose it. I would expect battery swaps to be the same way. So an appointment is made in advance and what do we do to make sure we arrive in time for appointments? We arrive early. The whole point of the battery swap is to reduce wasted time charging. So how does it help to have to arrive 15 to 30 minutes early to make sure of meeting the appointment, vs. simply spending 45 minutes to charge?
> >
> > It's hard to imagine a battery swap for trucks that is so rapid that
> > no appointment is needed. But maybe that's just the limit of my
> > imagination.
> I can't see it being significantly slower than swapping trailers.
>
> drive into position, unplug the cables, release the clamps, whistle
> for a fork-lift, crane, or whatever.
> > The main issue will likely be the company itself. You are limited
> > to working with one outfit, serving how large an area? They can even
> > fold.
> yeah, it's a risk if you're stuck with a single provider.

Too many engineers, too few who think. So a random truck drives in and the battery is replaced with no payment, no nothing? Even swapping a trailer means you have to park one trailer, uncouple, jack up the stands, then pull away, align with the other trailer, ect.

Other than the first few, this won't be done by someone with a fork lift. Fork lift operators break things too often. Maybe they will find a way to optimize this, but I don't see how a 10 or 15 minute battery swap is going to be that much more useful than plugging in to charge while going inside to crap and eat. This invention satisfies a need that doesn't exist in the case of truckers. Truckers have to stop to eat. They are not machines. There is already time enough to charge in a trucker's schedule. If you use a smaller battery to improve payload capacity, you stop twice for 15 minutes each, you still have to stop for 30 minutes for the driver!

So maybe someone should stop looking at the engineering minutia and explain the use case in detail? I'm not seeing it.

--

Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 12:19:37 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 20:52:41 +0100, RichD <r_dela...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >
> > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >
> > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> It's only fast while there's enough Lithium and electricity to go around. These are both running very low.

It's going to be terrible when we use up all the electricity and have to do without. I don't know why no one is working on an electricity substitute. Maybe we can use fiber optics and channel light around to supply energy. There's always light, well, at least in the daytime.

--

Rick C.

--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 17:45:33 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 12:19:37 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 20:52:41 +0100, RichD <r_dela...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>> > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>> >
>> > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>> > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>> >
>> > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>> It's only fast while there's enough Lithium and electricity to go around. These are both running very low.
>
> It's going to be terrible when we use up all the electricity and have to do without. I don't know why no one is working on an electricity substitute. Maybe we can use fiber optics and channel light around to supply energy. There's always light, well, at least in the daytime.

We need to start recycling electrons.

As for light, why not a fiber optic cable from the other side of the world?

"Commander Kinsey" <CK1@nospam.com> wrote in
news:op.1koec5avmvhs6z@ryzen.lan:

> We need to start recycling electrons.
>

They do not deplete, you stupid fuck.

On 16/4/22 2:25 am, Ricky wrote:
> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:00:53 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>> On 15/4/22 11:57 am, Ricky wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:48:23 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>>>> On 15/4/22 9:19 am, Ricky wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>>>>>> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>>>>>>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
>>>>>>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
>>>>>>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
>>>>>>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
>>>>>>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
>>>>>>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
>>>>>> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
>>>>>> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
>>>>>> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
>>>>>> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
>>>>>> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
>>>>>> installed every few 100km along major highways.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
>>>>>
>>>> Rechargable. Currently Lithium, but the module form factor is designed
>>>> to adapt to likely new chemistries. The important point is the drive
>>>> motor and battery fits into the existing motor cavity and fuel tank
>>>> locations, so there is no structural modification required.
>>>>
>>>> The conversion cost is equivalent to rebuilding or replacing the diesel,
>>>> and the operating cost per kilometre a little over half, and service
>>>> costs also significantly reduced.
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=Interchangeable%20Parts>
>>>
>>> I suppose a battery swap might be more useful for a truck than for cars. But there are issues with scheduling. When a truck has a delivery, that delivery has a schedule. You arrive by the time of your dock appointment or you lose it. I would expect battery swaps to be the same way. So an appointment is made in advance and what do we do to make sure we arrive in time for appointments? We arrive early. The whole point of the battery swap is to reduce wasted time charging. So how does it help to have to arrive 15 to 30 minutes early to make sure of meeting the appointment, vs. simply spending 45 minutes to charge?
>>>
>>> It's hard to imagine a battery swap for trucks that is so rapid that no appointment is needed. But maybe that's just the limit of my imagination.
>> It's not that hard to read the damn FAQs, is it?
>
> This is one of those web sites I find very hard to read because instead of making the site legible, they chose to use stylish, like grey fonts with thin strokes. Sorry, they clearly are not looking for business or investment from me.
>
> I think I was in second grade when I was taught to not read every word individually, but to scan the paragraph looking at the shapes of words. My vision is no longer good enough to be able to do that for these obscured web sites. So rather than read every word, one at a time, I read none of them and visit web sites that aren't designed to torture their viewers.
>
> That's why I am not interested in reading the *damn* FAQ.

And this is why I have you shaded, and rarely read your posts.
You have no time to think, no time to read, but plenty of time to
dribble your brains out in a post that you expect *others* to read and
take seriously.

>> For an e-power enthusiast, you're very full of reasons why it won't
>> work. Yet you bleat so loudly when people act the same way about Tesla's.
>
> Analogies are only useful when they are useful analogies. What I say about BEVs has nothing to do with this company. I didn't even know e-power was a thing.
>
> If you think my points are of no value, then explain that to me.

> So maybe someone should stop looking at the engineering minutia and explain the use case

Put in more time reading and thinking instead of just writing, and you
might have something worth saying.

There is *one* route where this system is being trialled -
Sydney-Brisbane. It's Australia's most heavily-trucked route - hundreds
of trucks a day drive this nine-hour route, so there's no issue with
needing to sleep en route, and food is already catered by existing
service centres. This one route represents a perfectly adequate reason
for some prime movers to be converted, specialised for that route only.

There is plenty of roadside real estate where these battery stations can
easily be built with multiple bays, and directly on the wide road
reservation. We have these rest stops already built every ten or twenty
kilometres - most have no more structures than a composting toilet. But
if there's power nearby (and there often is) then a charge/exchange
station can be built there. The point is that trucks just pull into a
side track beside the highway, there's no diversion.

> So maybe someone should stop looking at the engineering minutia and
explain the use case

Maybe you should pull you head out of your arse and read *what has
already been written* instead of writing reams more nonsense out of your
own fetid imagination?

CH

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 12:49:52 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 17:45:33 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 12:19:37 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> >> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 20:52:41 +0100, RichD <r_dela...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >> > The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >> >
> >> > Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >> > that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >> >
> >> > I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >> It's only fast while there's enough Lithium and electricity to go around. These are both running very low.
> >
> > It's going to be terrible when we use up all the electricity and have to do without. I don't know why no one is working on an electricity substitute. Maybe we can use fiber optics and channel light around to supply energy.. There's always light, well, at least in the daytime.
> We need to start recycling electrons.

I always recycle my electrons. I also use only recycled electrons. I support a cleaner sub-atomic world.

> As for light, why not a fiber optic cable from the other side of the world?

Sound good to me. I use fiber optics from my neighbor's security light.

--

Rick C.

-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 6:00:57 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> On 16/4/22 2:25 am, Ricky wrote:
> > On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:00:53 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >> On 15/4/22 11:57 am, Ricky wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:48:23 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >>>> On 15/4/22 9:19 am, Ricky wrote:
> >>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >>>>>> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz..dk wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> >>>>>>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> >>>>>>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> >>>>>>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> >>>>>>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> >>>>>>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> >>>>>> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> >>>>>> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries.. The
> >>>>>> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> >>>>>> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
> >>>>>> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
> >>>>>> installed every few 100km along major highways.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
> >>>>>
> >>>> Rechargable. Currently Lithium, but the module form factor is designed
> >>>> to adapt to likely new chemistries. The important point is the drive
> >>>> motor and battery fits into the existing motor cavity and fuel tank
> >>>> locations, so there is no structural modification required.
> >>>>
> >>>> The conversion cost is equivalent to rebuilding or replacing the diesel,
> >>>> and the operating cost per kilometre a little over half, and service
> >>>> costs also significantly reduced.
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=Interchangeable%20Parts>
> >>>
> >>> I suppose a battery swap might be more useful for a truck than for cars. But there are issues with scheduling. When a truck has a delivery, that delivery has a schedule. You arrive by the time of your dock appointment or you lose it. I would expect battery swaps to be the same way. So an appointment is made in advance and what do we do to make sure we arrive in time for appointments? We arrive early. The whole point of the battery swap is to reduce wasted time charging. So how does it help to have to arrive 15 to 30 minutes early to make sure of meeting the appointment, vs. simply spending 45 minutes to charge?
> >>>
> >>> It's hard to imagine a battery swap for trucks that is so rapid that no appointment is needed. But maybe that's just the limit of my imagination..
> >> It's not that hard to read the damn FAQs, is it?
> >
> > This is one of those web sites I find very hard to read because instead of making the site legible, they chose to use stylish, like grey fonts with thin strokes. Sorry, they clearly are not looking for business or investment from me.
> >
> > I think I was in second grade when I was taught to not read every word individually, but to scan the paragraph looking at the shapes of words. My vision is no longer good enough to be able to do that for these obscured web sites. So rather than read every word, one at a time, I read none of them and visit web sites that aren't designed to torture their viewers.
> >
> > That's why I am not interested in reading the *damn* FAQ.
> And this is why I have you shaded, and rarely read your posts.

I like the fact that my vision is not perfect is the reason why you don't read my posts. Interesting. So why do you keep participating in this conversation?

> You have no time to think, no time to read, but plenty of time to
> dribble your brains out in a post that you expect *others* to read and
> take seriously.

I have tons of time. I don't have the patience to deal with crap web sites or marketing drivel.

> >> For an e-power enthusiast, you're very full of reasons why it won't
> >> work. Yet you bleat so loudly when people act the same way about Tesla's.
> >
> > Analogies are only useful when they are useful analogies. What I say about BEVs has nothing to do with this company. I didn't even know e-power was a thing.
> >
> > If you think my points are of no value, then explain that to me.
> > So maybe someone should stop looking at the engineering minutia and explain the use case
> Put in more time reading and thinking instead of just writing, and you
> might have something worth saying.

Meanwhile, you choose to attack me personally rather than being involved in a discussion of the facts. I think we see where the shortcomings of thinking lie.

> There is *one* route where this system is being trialled -
> Sydney-Brisbane. It's Australia's most heavily-trucked route - hundreds
> of trucks a day drive this nine-hour route, so there's no issue with
> needing to sleep en route, and food is already catered by existing
> service centres. This one route represents a perfectly adequate reason
> for some prime movers to be converted, specialised for that route only.
>
> There is plenty of roadside real estate where these battery stations can
> easily be built with multiple bays, and directly on the wide road
> reservation. We have these rest stops already built every ten or twenty
> kilometres - most have no more structures than a composting toilet. But
> if there's power nearby (and there often is) then a charge/exchange
> station can be built there. The point is that trucks just pull into a
> side track beside the highway, there's no diversion.

Of course there is some sort of diversion, something that wastes time to get the truck into the bay, make the financial arraignments. Get someone's attention to do the change. Or is it fully automatic like a vending machine?

But why you don't address the fact that this is solving a problem that doesn't exist? As I've already shown, a single stop to charge can be concurrent with the mandatory rest period (in the US anyway, not sure what laws are like down under). Someone commented that in the EU there are more/longer rest stops required. So there is already time for charging and no need for swapping batteries. Charging can be accommodated at existing truck stops with the addition of the chargers. It won't require extra land or zoning issues. It's an easy adaptation and can even be blended with the parking spots every truck stop provides. I don't know how large the battery swap buildings would be, but there has to be space for the inventory as well as means to charge them.

On 16/4/22 9:17 am, Ricky wrote:
> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 6:00:57 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
>>> That's why I am not interested in reading the *damn* FAQ.
>> And this is why I have you shaded, and rarely read your posts.
>
> I like the fact that my vision is not perfect is the reason why you don't read my posts.

You seem perfectly able to read. If you have vision defects, enable the
accessibility features of your browser so you don't get low-contrast text.

> So why do you keep participating in this conversation?

Because people who matter to me seemed inexplicably to be paying
attention to you. I have no idea why, because you've still said nothing
to deserve it.

If you want respect, you need to show some respect first.

When you write, you do it in the expectation that we will read.
You expect us to spend the time to read your dribble, yet you are too
lazy to do any reading yourself, so as to have something useful to say.

That is the epitome of disrespect, and it characterises almost *all* of
your posts in this forum. I skip them, because they're almost always
content-free.

>> You have no time to think, no time to read, but plenty of time to
>> dribble your brains out in a post that you expect *others* to read and
>> take seriously
> Meanwhile, you choose to attack me personally rather than being involved in a discussion of the facts.

Facts are good. I like facts. Unfortunately you choose not to seek or
offer any.

> But why you don't address the fact that this is solving a problem that doesn't exist?

Why do you care? It should be obvious that the truck owners, and the
system's other investors, have done their due diligence and found that
it is in fact a very real solution to a very real problem.

This can significantly reduce the cost of transport on Australia's
heaviest route, while providing a positive ROI for everyone involved,
from the first year. And you think that's not solving any problem,
because allow no facts to penetrate your thick skull?

> So there is already time for charging and no need for swapping batteries.

This method reduces the barrier for entry presented by the high cost of
the batteries. The truck owners get their ROI more quickly than the
system's investors, who own the batteries.

The conversion itself costs no more than an conventional engine
swap/rebuild.

>> Maybe you should pull you head out of your arse and read *what has
>> already been written* instead of writing reams more nonsense out of your
>> own fetid imagination?
>
> I'm having a conversation *here*.

No you're not. In a conversation, people pay attention to the other
side, and consider their response. You just dribble out whatever
nonsense gets triggered by your false understanding of things.

I keep hoping against hope that one day you will reflect on what I've
said (same on several occasions before, I might add), and will decide
you no longer want to be such an incorrigible bore. Not to say boor.

CH

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 4:17:11 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 6:00:57 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> > On 16/4/22 2:25 am, Ricky wrote:
> > > On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 3:00:53 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> > >> On 15/4/22 11:57 am, Ricky wrote:
> > >>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 7:48:23 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> > >>>> On 15/4/22 9:19 am, Ricky wrote:
> > >>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> > >>>>>> On 15/4/22 2:28 am, Ed Lee wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 8:46:32 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 6:44:19 PM UTC-4, lang...@fonz..dk wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> torsdag den 14. april 2022 kl. 00.38.16 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-7, lang...@fonz.dk wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> onsdag den 13. april 2022 kl. 23.02.08 UTC+2 skrev Ed Lee:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:52:45 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Today the electric cars are the quickest on the road.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The classic petrol muscle cars are vying for the silver medal.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Was it obvious to the designers, from day one,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> that this would be the case? Is it simply a power/weight calculation?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm congenitally leery of simple explanations -
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> For one thing, it's easier to install and control multiple motors. For maximum performance, you can put one (or more) motor per wheel, which is hard to do with ICE.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> And electric motors can usually handle quite a lot of extra power short term
> > >>>>>>>>>> I am thinking in terms of trucking. Perhaps 18 motors for 18 wheelers. Smaller distributed motors might work better for heavy cargo.
> > >>>>>>>>> trucks are not fast, and most of the cargo is going to be batteries ...
> > >>>>>>>> More FUD. Usually you post real information. What bee is up your bonnet about BEV trucks?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Biggest problem is to maintain the current truck/driver model, where they are driving 8 to 10 hours of the same truck. In that case, we might need upward of 10,000 pounds of batteries. However, there are always shorter hauls where they can decouple the drivers with trucks/trailers, or go with hybrid diesel/EV.
> > >>>>>> Read the link I sent. Standard prime movers are being retrofitted (in
> > >>>>>> under a week!) with electric drive motors and quick-swap batteries. The
> > >>>>>> trucks aren't limited by the geometry or aesthetics of a passenger car,
> > >>>>>> so standardised interchangable batteries are easily achievable.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The batteries are rented, so the owner just pays for the
> > >>>>>> power+depreciation. Battery exchange/charging stations are being
> > >>>>>> installed every few 100km along major highways.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm interested, but not enough to read through the fluff. Can you provide the pertinent facts? Are they talking about rechargeable batteries or primary cells, like aluminum-air?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Rechargable. Currently Lithium, but the module form factor is designed
> > >>>> to adapt to likely new chemistries. The important point is the drive
> > >>>> motor and battery fits into the existing motor cavity and fuel tank
> > >>>> locations, so there is no structural modification required.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The conversion cost is equivalent to rebuilding or replacing the diesel,
> > >>>> and the operating cost per kilometre a little over half, and service
> > >>>> costs also significantly reduced.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> <https://www.januselectric.com.au/#:~:text=Interchangeable%20Parts>
> > >>>
> > >>> I suppose a battery swap might be more useful for a truck than for cars. But there are issues with scheduling. When a truck has a delivery, that delivery has a schedule. You arrive by the time of your dock appointment or you lose it. I would expect battery swaps to be the same way. So an appointment is made in advance and what do we do to make sure we arrive in time for appointments? We arrive early. The whole point of the battery swap is to reduce wasted time charging. So how does it help to have to arrive 15 to 30 minutes early to make sure of meeting the appointment, vs. simply spending 45 minutes to charge?
> > >>>
> > >>> It's hard to imagine a battery swap for trucks that is so rapid that no appointment is needed. But maybe that's just the limit of my imagination.
> > >> It's not that hard to read the damn FAQs, is it?
> > >
> > > This is one of those web sites I find very hard to read because instead of making the site legible, they chose to use stylish, like grey fonts with thin strokes. Sorry, they clearly are not looking for business or investment from me.
> > >
> > > I think I was in second grade when I was taught to not read every word individually, but to scan the paragraph looking at the shapes of words. My vision is no longer good enough to be able to do that for these obscured web sites. So rather than read every word, one at a time, I read none of them and visit web sites that aren't designed to torture their viewers.
> > >
> > > That's why I am not interested in reading the *damn* FAQ.
> > And this is why I have you shaded, and rarely read your posts.
> I like the fact that my vision is not perfect is the reason why you don't read my posts. Interesting. So why do you keep participating in this conversation?
> > You have no time to think, no time to read, but plenty of time to
> > dribble your brains out in a post that you expect *others* to read and
> > take seriously.
> I have tons of time. I don't have the patience to deal with crap web sites or marketing drivel.
> > >> For an e-power enthusiast, you're very full of reasons why it won't
> > >> work. Yet you bleat so loudly when people act the same way about Tesla's.
> > >
> > > Analogies are only useful when they are useful analogies. What I say about BEVs has nothing to do with this company. I didn't even know e-power was a thing.
> > >
> > > If you think my points are of no value, then explain that to me.
> > > So maybe someone should stop looking at the engineering minutia and explain the use case
> > Put in more time reading and thinking instead of just writing, and you
> > might have something worth saying.
> Meanwhile, you choose to attack me personally rather than being involved in a discussion of the facts. I think we see where the shortcomings of thinking lie.
> > There is *one* route where this system is being trialled -
> > Sydney-Brisbane. It's Australia's most heavily-trucked route - hundreds
> > of trucks a day drive this nine-hour route, so there's no issue with
> > needing to sleep en route, and food is already catered by existing
> > service centres. This one route represents a perfectly adequate reason
> > for some prime movers to be converted, specialised for that route only.
> >
> > There is plenty of roadside real estate where these battery stations can
> > easily be built with multiple bays, and directly on the wide road
> > reservation. We have these rest stops already built every ten or twenty
> > kilometres - most have no more structures than a composting toilet. But
> > if there's power nearby (and there often is) then a charge/exchange
> > station can be built there. The point is that trucks just pull into a
> > side track beside the highway, there's no diversion.
> Of course there is some sort of diversion, something that wastes time to get the truck into the bay, make the financial arraignments. Get someone's attention to do the change. Or is it fully automatic like a vending machine?
>
> But why you don't address the fact that this is solving a problem that doesn't exist? As I've already shown, a single stop to charge can be concurrent with the mandatory rest period (in the US anyway, not sure what laws are like down under). Someone commented that in the EU there are more/longer rest stops required. So there is already time for charging and no need for swapping batteries. Charging can be accommodated at existing truck stops with the addition of the chargers. It won't require extra land or zoning issues. It's an easy adaptation and can even be blended with the parking spots every truck stop provides. I don't know how large the battery swap buildings would be, but there has to be space for the inventory as well as means to charge them.
> > > So maybe someone should stop looking at the engineering minutia and
> > explain the use case
> > Maybe you should pull you head out of your arse and read *what has
> > already been written* instead of writing reams more nonsense out of your
> > own fetid imagination?
> I'm having a conversation *here*. You've posted a link to a web site I've already explained I'm not going to struggle to read. If you have something useful to say, please say it. But stop being a horses ass about the simple fact that you are in a conversation you don't like. That has got to be the epitome of idiocy, to be in a conversation you hate, and rail about it constantly, rather than just shutting the fuck up!
>
> --
>
> Rick C.
>
> -+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
> -+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 11:34:07 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> On 16/4/22 9:17 am, Ricky wrote:
> > On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 6:00:57 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
> >>> That's why I am not interested in reading the *damn* FAQ.
> >> And this is why I have you shaded, and rarely read your posts.
> >
> > I like the fact that my vision is not perfect is the reason why you don't read my posts.
> You seem perfectly able to read. If you have vision defects, enable the
> accessibility features of your browser so you don't get low-contrast text..

You are an arrogant ass. There are no useful features available. You are the one who wants to discuss the web page. If you can't be bothered to explain it, I'm not going to jump through hoops to read the damn thing.

> > So why do you keep participating in this conversation?
> Because people who matter to me seemed inexplicably to be paying
> attention to you. I have no idea why, because you've still said nothing
> to deserve it.

Nope, you are the only one who is in this conversation with me. You seem rather obsessed with it. It has nothing to do with anyone else.

> If you want respect, you need to show some respect first.

I literally have zero interest in your respect. Is that clear enough for you?

> When you write, you do it in the expectation that we will read.
> You expect us to spend the time to read your dribble, yet you are too
> lazy to do any reading yourself, so as to have something useful to say.

If you want to read and reply, fine. If you don't want to read and reply, that's fine too. But clearly, you can't not read what I write. You do seem to be rather in an odd state. You talk as if reading my posts hugely annoy you, yet you keep, not only reading, but replying. Yes, very odd.

> That is the epitome of disrespect, and it characterises almost *all* of
> your posts in this forum. I skip them, because they're almost always
> content-free.

You simply have no respect for my handicap which is very different from having no respect for me. You are clearly not the sort of person who I wish to converse with.

> >> You have no time to think, no time to read, but plenty of time to
> >> dribble your brains out in a post that you expect *others* to read and
> >> take seriously
> > Meanwhile, you choose to attack me personally rather than being involved in a discussion of the facts.
> Facts are good. I like facts. Unfortunately you choose not to seek or
> offer any.
> > But why you don't address the fact that this is solving a problem that doesn't exist?
> Why do you care? It should be obvious that the truck owners, and the
> system's other investors, have done their due diligence and found that
> it is in fact a very real solution to a very real problem.

I don't see that at all. There are always people who get involved in bad ideas. Do you really not understand that??? If you don't understand that, you can't possibly judge useful projects from useless ones.

> This can significantly reduce the cost of transport on Australia's
> heaviest route, while providing a positive ROI for everyone involved,
> from the first year. And you think that's not solving any problem,
> because allow no facts to penetrate your thick skull?

It may produce an ROI. That's not the question. Will it continue to produce an ROI and will it be an optimal ROI? I suppose if you have to have a solution today, then this might be useful. But I've already explained that this approach may not have legs and you may end up stuck with a lemon that has no support if the company goes under.

> > So there is already time for charging and no need for swapping batteries.
> This method reduces the barrier for entry presented by the high cost of
> the batteries. The truck owners get their ROI more quickly than the
> system's investors, who own the batteries.

I haven't seen numbers, but I would be more interested in knowing if the ROI will continue after other solutions are available. Will this system remain competitive? I think the other systems will expand more quickly. Since Australia is a self contained, island country, it may turn out that this system becomes dominant there, while BEV trucks dominate in the rest of the world.

> The conversion itself costs no more than an conventional engine
> swap/rebuild.
> >> Maybe you should pull you head out of your arse and read *what has
> >> already been written* instead of writing reams more nonsense out of your
> >> own fetid imagination?
> >
> > I'm having a conversation *here*.
> No you're not. In a conversation, people pay attention to the other
> side, and consider their response. You just dribble out whatever
> nonsense gets triggered by your false understanding of things.
>
> I keep hoping against hope that one day you will reflect on what I've
> said (same on several occasions before, I might add), and will decide
> you no longer want to be such an incorrigible bore. Not to say boor.

Ok, I am reflecting on what you say. I'm done with you. I've tried to participate in a reasonable conversation, but you insist on being highly insulting because of my handicap. You don't see it as important and that I should take the effort to read a web site intentionally made difficult to read, just so you can converse with me more easily. I think of your handicap the same way. Yours is a mental attitude, and that is often as incurable as any other disease.

It's not like you have anything useful to say anyway. Your comments are basically, that this system is good and other systems are not as good. Brilliant! What insight! Thank you for your wisdom.

--

Rick C.

-++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Ricky wrote:

> Clifford Heath wrote:

>> You seem perfectly able to read. If you have vision defects, enable the
>
>> accessibility features of your browser so you don't get low-contrast
>> text

> You are an arrogant ass. There are no useful features available.

Of course not, Ricksy is using Google!

John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote in
news:t3dmeq$rje$2@dont-email.me:

> Ricky wrote:
>
>> Clifford Heath wrote:
>
>>> You seem perfectly able to read. If you have vision defects,
>>> enable the
>>
>>> accessibility features of your browser so you don't get
>>> low-contrast text
>
>> You are an arrogant ass. There are no useful features available.
>
> Of course not, Ricksy is using Google!
>

Ctrl +

Increases size on every web browser I ever saw. Ctrl 1 thru 9 as well
and Ctrl 0 resets it.

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 8:34:07 PM UTC-7, Clifford Heath wrote:
> This can significantly reduce the cost of transport on Australia's
> heaviest route, while providing a positive ROI for everyone involved,
> from the first year.

With the basic chassis ($50,000?), $85,000 conversion, $120,000 batteries, it's a 1/4 million truck. Doesn't matter who owns it, customers are indirectly paying for it.